It's a dog whistle that directly relates not only to a history of black minstrels

But also to the violence and mass murder of black Americans it lead to

It is not unlike saying to a Jewish person that they should get a yellow star lapel pin. Sure there is nothing wrong with stars, star pins of any color, but to say that to a Jewish person is not without context. And a claim of ignorance is not a excuse.

KFC is for white folks, if you wanna be down you've gotta get your hands greasy on some Harold's, Popeye's or Church's... especially Church's.

Hate to say this, but Harold's is so overrated. Without the sauce, it's almost tasteless, and with the sauce it's still not that good but way too soggy.

__________________A single flow'r he sent me, since we met./All tenderly his messenger he chose;
Deep-hearted, pure, with scented dew still wet - One perfect rose.I knew the language of the floweret;/'My fragile leaves,' it said, 'his heart enclose.'
Love long has taken for his amulet/One perfect rose.Why is it no one ever sent me yet/One perfect limousine, do you suppose?
Ah no, it's always just my luck to get/One perfect rose.

Hate to say this, but Harold's is so overrated. Without the sauce, it's almost tasteless, and with the sauce it's still not that good but way too soggy.

Since Harold died, many of the restaurants have taken liberties with the recipe. I only go to two of 'em in the city, that have been around since I was a kid, for the exact reasons you state. My order is always, "salt and pepper, mild sauce on the side."

Since Harold died, many of the restaurants have taken liberties with the recipe. I only go to 3 of 'em in the city that have been around since I was a kid, for the exact reasons you state. My order is always, "salt and pepper, mild sauce on the side."

^ That's how I order too. Still, I only go now when I have a craving.
Maybe my local Harold's is not one of your 3.

__________________A single flow'r he sent me, since we met./All tenderly his messenger he chose;
Deep-hearted, pure, with scented dew still wet - One perfect rose.I knew the language of the floweret;/'My fragile leaves,' it said, 'his heart enclose.'
Love long has taken for his amulet/One perfect rose.Why is it no one ever sent me yet/One perfect limousine, do you suppose?
Ah no, it's always just my luck to get/One perfect rose.

It's a dog whistle that directly relates not only to a history of black minstrels

But also to the violence and mass murder of black Americans it lead to

It is not unlike saying to a Jewish person that they should get a yellow star lapel pin. Sure there is nothing wrong with stars, star pins of any color, but to say that to a Jewish person is not without context. And a claim of ignorance is not a excuse.

Again, I must point out that you are committing the "common sense" fallacy, based on your own life and experiences. The natural human biological and sexual instinct is to look for sexual partners that will diversify their gene pool, not look for people who look just like them. This is why all human cultures have the incest taboo and most cultures have historically practiced partner sharing across different groups, because it increases the diversity of the gene pool and offspring will have shared characteristics of multiple genetic clusters, which increases offspring's ability to adapt to different environmental stresses. Throughout history, people who look extremely different have migrated, had sex with eachother and produced offspring, despite their different backgrounds. It was not until European scientific racism (white supremacy) that humans began to see themselves in rigidly, racial terms, and assign characteristics to those races which affects how attracted you are to individuals of different backgrounds.

What do you mean? I said I've heard of studies stating such things. Why do you think that has to do with my own life or experiences?

"people who look extremely different have migrated, had sex with eachother and produced offspring"

You think I don't know this!!?

"It was not until European scientific racism (white supremacy) that humans began to see themselves in rigidly, racial terms, and assign characteristics to those races which affects how attracted you are to individuals of different backgrounds"

Hmmmm, I wonder if you're implying that I'm only attracted to my own kind and that I was advocating the ideas that I wrote about in my post. I was not, perhaps I didn't explain myself well enough in my post. I was merely relaying something that I heard in a documentary and found interesting. I'm Irish. I've never had sex or a relationship with an Irish person. I've never even had sex with a "white" person, unless you count Hispanic/Latino Americans. My boyfriend of 3.5 years is African American. I'm attracted to all kinds, though, and have been with non-Americans too!

Also, I'm fairly familiar with scientific racism as it was often employed very well by the British to depict Irish people are subhuman or animalistic and in need of "civilising". It made pillaging, exploitation, evictions, beatings, rapes, murders, executions and massacres all the easier for their forces to carry out. It made it easier for hundreds of thousands of people, many of whom were children, to be exported as slaves, especially during the Cromwellian period. It also made it easier to hugely increase the "exportation" of crops and livestock during the famine and at the same time demand that starving families complete a full day of backbreaking work in the soup kitchens before they would be given any sustenance. So, believe me, if I thought that that documentary was in any way rooted or influenced by such thinking, I would not have taken any interest in it. Again, I was not advocating the theory, just expressing how interesting I found it. To be honest, I think that human attraction is so complex that I think there is room for both ideas. Of course, looking for people quite different from you, would go along with the idea of spreading one's seed.

I think that people are probably attracted to people that resemble themselves but not those who necessarily look (just) like themselves. When I have lived abroad, or travelled to other countries I've often seen people and labelled them, "my French uncle," "my Chinese BFF," "my Brazilian neighbour," or "my Qatari former teacher" because they seemed to resemble people from my life - often not just in their looks but also in how they've carried themselves (if that means anything?) I've seen people like this so much, that I often look out for doubles when I go away. People like this would fit both theories - of choosing someone with some sense of familiarity but also some differences.

The documentary went on to describe how people are attracted to symmetry, especially facial symmetry, as this is apparently a sign of a person with good genes and an absence of visible and even non-visible defects. Scientists mapped thousands of people's faces (or something like that) and found that the most symmetrical face (and thus most "desirable" face) belonged to a half-Syrian, quarter-French, quarter-Irish woman. So, you see that even in the documentary they weren't necessarily advocating "sticking to your own kind." I myself find perfection can sometimes be a bit boring (though not always) Actually, I often think of Sharapova and think, there's nothing wrong with her face, some would say it's perfect but, on the other hand, there's not a lot that's striking about it. She's pretty but she's fairly plain and so I think near-perfection can sometimes be better but maybe that's because my face isn't perfectly symmetrical! I think that Syrian woman was on the cover of People. She was Syrian-American, I think.

cause you know hipsters stop liking things after they get popular.
It was just a joke.

No, I still like it, but unlike McDonald's you can't just go to any old Harold's and expect the same quality and taste. I did get all "hipster" when they started selling Coor's in Illinois. Before, we had to drive to Indiana for it.

What do you mean? I said I've heard of studies stating such things. Why do you think that has to do with my own life or experiences?

"people who look extremely different have migrated, had sex with eachother and produced offspring"

You think I don't know this!!?

"It was not until European scientific racism (white supremacy) that humans began to see themselves in rigidly, racial terms, and assign characteristics to those races which affects how attracted you are to individuals of different backgrounds"

Hmmmm, I wonder if you're implying that I'm only attracted to my own kind and that I was advocating the ideas that I wrote about in my post. I was not, perhaps I didn't explain myself well enough in my post. I was merely relaying something that I heard in a documentary and found interesting. I'm Irish. I've never had sex or a relationship with an Irish person. I've never even had sex with a "white" person, unless you count Hispanic/Latino Americans. My boyfriend of 3.5 years is African American. I'm attracted to all kinds, though, and have been with non-Americans too!

Also, I'm fairly familiar with scientific racism as it was often employed very well by the British to depict Irish people are subhuman or animalistic and in need of "civilising". It made pillaging, exploitation, evictions, beatings, rapes, murders, executions and massacres all the easier for their forces to carry out. It made it easier for hundreds of thousands of people, many of whom were children, to be exported as slaves, especially during the Cromwellian period. It also made it easier to hugely increase the "exportation" of crops and livestock during the famine and at the same time demand that starving families complete a full day of backbreaking work in the soup kitchens before they would be given any sustenance. So, believe me, if I thought that that documentary was in any way rooted or influenced by such thinking, I would not have taken any interest in it. Again, I was not advocating the theory, just expressing how interesting I found it. To be honest, I think that human attraction is so complex that I think there is room for both ideas. Of course, looking for people quite different from you, would go along with the idea of spreading one's seed.

I think that people are probably attracted to people that resemble themselves but not those who necessarily look (just) like themselves. When I have lived abroad, or travelled to other countries I've often seen people and labelled them, "my French uncle," "my Chinese BFF," "my Brazilian neighbour," or "my Qatari former teacher" because they seemed to resemble people from my life - often not just in their looks but also in how they've carried themselves (if that means anything?) I've seen people like this so much, that I often look out for doubles when I go away. People like this would fit both theories - of choosing someone with some sense of familiarity but also some differences.

The documentary went on to describe how people are attracted to symmetry, especially facial symmetry, as this is apparently a sign of a person with good genes and an absence of visible and even non-visible defects. Scientists mapped thousands of people's faces (or something like that) and found that the most symmetrical face (and thus most "desirable" face) belonged to a half-Syrian, quarter-French, quarter-Irish woman. So, you see that even in the documentary they weren't necessarily advocating "sticking to your own kind." I myself find perfection can sometimes be a bit boring (though not always) Actually, I often think of Sharapova and think, there's nothing wrong with her face, some would say it's perfect but, on the other hand, there's not a lot that's striking about it. She's pretty but she's fairly plain and so I think near-perfection can sometimes be better but maybe that's because my face isn't perfectly symmetrical! I think that Syrian woman was on the cover of People. She was Syrian-American, I think.

No, I wasn't talking about you specifically, kwilliams. Just the idea that sometimes ideas/theories can make "common sense" (based on the idea of collective life experiences) and that makes them appear compelling, even though they are not true. I have seen similar documentaries about the role of symmetry in attraction, but I often ask: who was polled in those studies? I know most psychology experiments in the US are conducted on white, male, middle-class American college students, which of course limits the level of generalizations one can extrapolate from the results, especially if one wants to speak in global, cross-cultural terms. Symmetry may be important, but who defines the parameters of where symmetry begins and ends? Which features must be symmetrical? If you have a wide, flat nose and/or a large, round butt, does that automatically make you asymmetrical? Based on what standards, a Western European ideal?

Are those tests measuring natural, human biological/psychological tendencies, or just the way that we have been enculturated by Western media to find certain features attractive? Things to consider.